User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 17

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page.
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Why you deleted this contribution?

Why did you deleted the work "Biogeochemical Selectiveness of Cedars Over Metamorphic Rocks of the Escambray Complex, Sancti Spíritus, Cuba"? Please, respond to vallsvg@gmail.com

Cordially,

Ricardo Valls

Vallsvg (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

See the deletion log. Also replied by email. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 02:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgot

Forgot to log in, all those changes being made to sprains, etc were me. --Nugger (talk) 02:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, even so they're wrong :P w:Sprains#Treatment. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 02:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually this is straight from the ARC as per the new protocols. --Nugger (talk) 02:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Got a source? – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 02:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Instructors Manual for CPR/AED/First Aid for the Workplace, Schools and the Community. ISBN: 1-58480-340-1 Printed by StayWell. As well as student workbook ISBN: 1-58480-341-X This is how we are teaching first aid now. --Nugger (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Ugh, paper :(. What's the publication date on that? And incidentally, that's ARC, right? I don't know of anyone else who does that (including CRC), and offhand I don't recall anything international happening on that front, so I wonder what we want to use... BTW, the book's scope was codified following the FB nom. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 02:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

You can also look here under page 5 and Muscle, bone and joint injuries.: www.redcross-pdx.org/news/Guidelines_for_First_Aid.pdf --Nugger (talk) 02:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Automating Manufacturing Systems new book.....

Hello Mike,

I am the sole author of the book and it has been available for a couple of years now under the GFDL. I am porting a version of it to Wikibooks. To this end I have added a license notice that should satisfy your needs. So far I have only added a small part to work out the conversion kinks.

http://claymore.engineer.gvsu.edu/~jackh/books/plcs/

Please be patient, I am new to wiki posting - I cannot seem to upload images. Is there something I need to do? Also, does the wiki support some vector formats, SVG would be preferred. Ideally I would like to be able to let others edit the figures without having to manipulate bitmaps.

Hugh jack (talk) 08:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Hugh_Jack

Sounds good to me! I've removed the notice.

You're not able to upload images until your account is four days old, but after that you can do so at Special:Upload. Even better would be uploading images to Commons, since these images are freely licensed. Putting them at Commons allows all projects to use the images, so it's a bigger benefit to us if you would do that. Also, you don't have to wait to upload at Commons, just register an account.

SVG is excellent. There are a few things which will not render properly, but they are quite rare. As well, we have some support for TeX markup using <math></math> which is preferred whenever possible for equations. So equations in TeX, diagrams in svg, and only drawings, photos etc. should be raster (png if possible). If you need any help with stuff, come on back! – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 10:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Logo discussion, next phase?

I don't want to hassle you about this, although I'm too busy to do it myself. I think that soonish (today maybe, by the end of the week otherwise), we need to move to the next stage of the logo selection process. Here are the list of the top-10 logo families that (in my opinion) seem to have the most support so far. You may want to write up your own list and compare to mine:

a, d/r, l, n, s, u, y/z, 1/2/3, 5/6

The tenth position could belong to either o or v, I can't tell which is more popular of the two.

I think for the next stage, we take the top 10, and give each of them a subpage of their own for discussion. Designers have about a month to select a single "best" example of that logo family, and once the "best" one is produced, we put that onto a voting page and we vote on it. To recap (mostly for my benefit):

Create sub-pages for each logo family, possibly copy + paste all the logos to that subpage
Each subpage must select one "best" logo
We put the best logo from each subpage onto the main page no later then May 15th (or so). Proposals which fail to produce a "best" could be disqualified, or we could select one on their behalf.
After that, we start the final voting round.

Do you agree with this general course of events? I can start writing up blog entries, or a post to foundation-l or whatever once we know what we're doing. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Both the process and the list look good. For the 10th, I'd say v is in and o is out -- same amount of commenting, but there are some negative comments at o, whereas v is almost exclusively positive. I'm thinking cross-posting a single message to textbook-l and foundation-l is good. Also a post to commons-l to see if we can get some good graphics artists involved. And then blogs if you want... I don't follow any, so I don't know what's what there; I'll let you take care of it. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 18:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Transclusion problems

Hi Mike can you take a look into [[1]] post "Hello again". We are experiencing some transclusion problems, I think I understand the reason of the page not being rendered as expected but you may know better or a way to preserve the linked structure (as in being self generated from a single location) by other means. --Panic (talk) 19:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I think the problem is there were too many layers of includes. The size wasn't a problem, but the depth of the transclusion hierarchy was, so I just took what was at /All Chapters and put it at /Print Version. If you're worried about people keeping it up-to-date, then to get it to work, you'll have to reduce the number of layers of transclusion. Also, I removed __TOC__ from /Chapter Fundamentals so it wouldn't appear on the print version (TOC overrides NOTOC), but now /Chapter Fundamentals doesn't have one. Not sure what to do about that... Sorry I can't help more. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 19:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation – A Guide to Better Documents in Another Language

Hello,

This book was not intended as spam; it is based on my experience as a freelance translator. This is items that people who want text translated often are not aware of. Is this a subject that I can publish on WikiBooks? What kind of changes should I make?

Regards,
Per Magnus —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Permag (talk • contribs) 03:44, April 17, 2008.

OK, I've undeleted it. I strongly recommend that you avoid talking about a particular product or service on the internet, as that would be promotional. Instead, you should think more broadly about translation as an art and a science, and cover all of that ground in the text. You'll want to talk about why machine translation is so crude, the options (not just one) of getting human translators through the internet, and then move on to teach about translation (not dealing with one or another language, but stuff that's applicable to all languages). I'll keep an eye on development & try to help you along if need be. Good luck! – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 12:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I see what you mean and will update and rearrange the document.
Maybe the title ”Translation” is to specific. It would be better to keep the heading “Translation – A Guide to Better Documents in Another Language” as the name of the book.
Regards,
Per M.
--Permag (talk) 08:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The Ultra-Complete Index

Could you comment on s:WS:PD#The_Ultra-Complete_Index ; is this appropriate for Wikibooks ? John Vandenberg (talk) 17:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

explanation

Why did you delete this content? I'm working to develop this book online but in the meantime need to use other resources so that my students and others are not left hanging in the dark. Please restore the Implementations section. Thanks. Typative (talk) 13:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I've restored the page, but please not that Wikibooks is not a link repository. The number of links seems excessive to me. Furthermore, there is no content - not even an outline. Until there is at least an outline of the book you're planning, the page is liable to be deleted again. I'll be watching the page for additions & I look forward to seeing your work progress. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 13:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mike. This particular list was provided to me by a Wikipedia editor and I apologize for not screening it prior to posting. I will delete all links to what are obvious advertisements and begin working on an outline and content immediately. Thanks for your help. Typative (talk) 17:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like an excellent plan :) – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 03:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Images from Zine making/Putting pages together

I saw your comment here regarding the images on the "Putting pages together" section. I made these and I would love to hear your opinion on them before I try to upload them to the commons:Two Four Six -Thereen (talk) 18:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They're perfectly useful, and I encourage you to upload them there yourself. Those should be in svg format though. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 03:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

OTRS

Hey Mike, Did you get in...?

Reedy (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I did. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 03:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Logos

Ooops. That will teach me to do things late at night :-S. Oh well I think the ones I liked have survived anyway. I'll have to try and make some more in depth comments when I'm not half asleep! BTW the message at the top of the page needs updating. --AdRiley (talk) 08:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Message at the top of which page...? – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 09:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. The pop-up message thing that you can dismiss. Not sure what it is called or how to change it. But it currently says

"Wikibooks and Wikijunior logo discussions are nearing an end. The top 10 choices will move on to the final around. This is your last chance to give your feedback on all the logos and help make sure your favorite makes it!"--AdRiley (talk) 11:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sure. I have it hidden... I'll go update the sitenotice now. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 14:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the scanned pages.

Well, thanks that you let me retain the handwritten scans - I guarantee they're mine. The main purpose of scanning was just lack of time on my part.

The test paper scans

I have already explained on User_talk:Webaware how the test papers are NOT a copyright infringement! I'll put my arguement once more: -

The test papers were originally intended for IIT - JEE, an examination at the national level in India. Students were not allowed to take the papers home for reasons not known. [Some tests in India do not even allow students to keep their entry passes/hall tickets with them once the examination is over]. So the papers we have with us are RECREATED based on students' discussions with tutors or among themselves.
If ever any book publishes the test papers, it is purely for reference. The actual content that the book publishers own copyright for is the solutions, which - I can assure you - are pathetic, dry and uninteresting.
The above point can be emphasized through the fact that atleast five sources publish the same question papers or have published at some time or the other.These are http://www.fiitjee.com http://www.bansaliitjee.com http://www.narayanadelhi.com http://www.pcmbtoday.com. The first two offer the latest test papers on their site as freebies, solutions included. Arihant Prakashan offers solutions compiled as a reference book. The last one - MTG publications - publish the question papers along with the solutions as and when the tests are taken in their monthly education related journals.

I hope this clears any doubts regarding the copyright status of the IIT JEE Papers. I will, however, cease uploading printed pages. I also assume that it automatically justifies my subsequent submissions of the question papers as text. --Thewinster (talk) 17:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying make here. When someone writes that stuff down, they create something to which they own the copyright. This is called fixation. It doesn't matter whether it is based on their recollection of discussions with tutors or what have you. Simply the act of writing it down creates the copyright. Furthermore, the fact that they're published online probably means they are copyrighted. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but that seems akin to saying that "I found it through Google - that website wouldn't have posted it if they didn't want it to be freely available." – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 18:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Check my edit above in green and then read ahead. The confusion arouse because my last post assumed you read Webaware's talk page. I hope it will be easier to pass on a verdict from here. :D

Consider source 1 - let us say Arihant Prakashan. They publish the question paper sets along with their solutions in the form of a for sale reference book with a clear copyright notice on the solution. Wouldn't they have sued the other four sources for publishing the question papers in their journals or online for free if they had owned the copyrights to the papers? The point in referencing five sources was not that those papers were free but that the question papers are nobody's property - intellectual or otherwise.
When someone writes that stuff down, they create something to which they own the copyright. This is called fixation. It doesn't matter whether it is based on their recollection of discussions with tutors or what have you. Simply the act of writing it down creates the copyright. While it is perfectly true, we need to note that the papers are set by Profs at the IITs. How can third party teachers win copyrights over them by just writing them down? This is equivalent to handing over the copyrights of the Bible to some priest who memorised it and wrote it down somewhere. This, I emphasize, is not a joke or a retort - it is a perfect metaphor of the situation.

--Thewinster (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Bloom Clock bot run, again :)

Heya Mike,

Time for another update... slightly more complicated this time though: let me know if there's a problem.

Following either of 2 categories: v:Category:Bcptop v. 8.3.9 or v:Category:Bcpmiddle v. 7.11.6

The top template is easy: just "grab":

| version tracking for top template (for robotic use) = 8.3.9

and replace with:

| Higher taxa = 
| Cookbook link = 
| General information = 
| version tracking for top template (for robotic use) = 8.4.25

The middle template is slightly more complicated (3 replacements):

Grab:

| New Region 1 =

and replace with

| Western Bohemia =

Note: Do not replace the whole line. There may already be data entered on some pages!

Grab:

| New Region 2 =

and replace with

| Victoria, Australia =

Note: Do not replace the whole line. There is already some data entered on some pages!

Then finally, Grab:

| version tracking for middle template (for robotic use) = 7.11.6

and replace with:

| New Region 3 = 
| New Region 4 = 
| New Region 5 = 
| New Region 6 = 
| New Region 7 = 
| New Region 8 = 
| New Region 9 = 
| New Region 10 = 
| New Region 11 = 
| New Region 12 = 
| version tracking for middle template (for robotic use) = 8.4.25

The idea in the future is to just keep assigning new regions whenever a contributor is ready for one, and then robotically change the BCP page text later. You can see how I'm doing that here, if you're interested. We have a very large number of new contributors lately, so will probably need another bot run again in a month or so to re-update the middle template (and possibly add some stuff to the bottom template as well).

Thanks again! --SB_Johnny | ^PA! 10:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Done – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 20:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

WB interview

Yes, I am stilling doing yours. I am really busy with exam until next Tuesday. All publications are pushed back 2 weeks (see the schedule). Those dates are not corrected yet, so the earliest for Wikibooks interview to be published is May 12. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yup, noted. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 17:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The verdict

Just wondering. What was the conclusion of the discussion above? Hoping a positive reply! Thanks --Thewinster (talk) 18:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm still convinced you don't have the right to release that content under the GFDL, though who the copyright holder actually is is unclear. Nevertheless, it seems clear to me that someone's rights are being infringed here (probably the students'). – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 20:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Awww...!!! Unlucky me! Why? Why does it infringe the students' rights? If we get back at it, the students have no role to play other than recall from memory what somebody else them asked in some question paper. By doing so if they do not infringe anyone's copyrights why is that we are infringing? As a matter of fact even I am a student who has answered that examination. If the invisible student has any copyrights, am I not able to release it under the GFDL? If they do not then we have got to find the copyright owners.

You may be right, there is a copyright but to whom it belongs is unclear. The problem is

The IITs set a question paper
Nowhere in the examination brochure, question paper, counselling brochure or any web presence of the IITs does anyone mention or claim any copyright over the question papers.

Any doubts whatsoever and I try my best to present you with the relevant details! --Thewinster (talk) 17:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the questions are copyrighted by whoever wrote them in the first place, regardless of whether they're marked as such. If someone copied them (even from memory) that is technically a copyright violation. A scan of said copyright violation is therefore also a copyright violation. I'm not crystal clear on the caselaw, but if you insist, I can look it up. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 18:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I did say I wont be uploading scans. And thanks for the little offer to look up to the legalese. Defintely yes for that.

By the way, I just got a little query. Many many questions on the question paper are standard ones, say 2+2=? for a first grade student and the likes only that they have altered the presentation a bit. What if we alter the question paper language and the presentation etc.? Can we circumvent this technical copyright violation? I say technical because no one will actually bother to claim copyright on this work! It is for the immense responsibility that wikimedia has to show in its content policy that we have to do censor the QPs I guess.

Very simple stuff like that are {{PD-ineligible}} so feel free to use those! – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 13:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Finally! Well, that 2+2=4 analogy is strictly an analogy. The question papers are of a respectable level, but the thing is - they contain work that is common property. --Thewinster (talk) 18:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My screenshot's probpem...

Some time ago, I've expanded article MediaWiki_Administrator's_Handbook/Spam_and_Spammers and added sreenshots of some captcha plugins.

These screenshots were removed...

Can you please solve the problem with this screenshots?

1. These pluguins are opensource.

2. I've made this screenshots myself

2.1. As an author of these screenshots I wish to share them at any licence that is acceptebe at your site.

What else can I do in order to get these images back to the article?

PS please add copy of the answer, or a link to it to my talk page, so I will be able to receive it.

Shaplov (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Restored, fixed & reverted the removals. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 14:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image uploads

Thanks for the note re "source". I drew the images myself, what does "source" mean in that context? I should put my name? That would be odd since the name is already in the "Author" slot, so what to do? --Mcld (talk) 13:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

"self-made" would be perfect. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 21:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Proteomics: Corticosteroids

I was trying to make this page for a school prodject. Do you want me to wait untill its complete to post it?

You can post it whenever you want (please follow the naming policy), but test edits should be made in the sandbox. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 01:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but...

I don't want to come across as objecting to every nominations you make, but since you are the one making most of them I will mostly object to yours. In the same subject I pretty much against deletion of content if not directly opposed to policy and even on some stances I will probably push the envelope on what is acceptable and will support most changes that can make Wikibooks more inclusive.
On the copyvio I'm strongly against bringing copyvio discussions to the VfD forum, I have prety much explained why I object to it but mostly because delete votes will mostly made without any deep understanding of facts, event and consideration to contributors to the works involved.
Ok just to make it clear to you that I'm not blinding objecting to your cleanup work but only to some of your decisions or approaches to some issues. --Panic (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

{{copyvio}} is for blatant copyright violations - that is perhaps not the case with Ear piercing. As an aside, I don't see what's wrong with !voting delete based solely on copyright concerns and not "any deep understanding of facts, event and consideration to contributors to the works involved." Copyright violations are a perfectly valid reason to delete, so why would you need anything additional? – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 03:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No you misunderstood me, I don't propose anything special at all and I don't view {{copyvio}} as only to be used to blatant violation (I particularly don't like the level of "confidence" you seem to imply with the word), it is or it is not (in doubt it is not), any one not being/representing the copyright holder doesn't have the legal obligation of researching and provide prof of ownership, some of us do it as a preemptive measure to protect the legality of the content we use, the project and Wikimedia and mostly only on clear evidence of a copyright violation.

As I read and understand the requirements the copyvio tag is a better avenue than bringing to the accusation to a more public forum, simply using the copyvio tag (and we expect everyone does it with the needed considerations and with a good moral ground) permits the parties involved not only to be aware of the problem but also avenues to address the issue.

I don't see any way a person would vote keep to a VfD nomination based on a copyvio allegation and don't see it as the best approach to a productive resolution of the problem, the only instance I see for calling outside (of the work/edit) intervention is to help establish the facts and VfD doesn't seem the best place for it. Bringing a copyvio to a VfD discussion is almost guaranteed to make it mush more difficult to the "problematic" contributor to resolve the issue, I think this is avoidable and stream lined by simply using the copyvio that will target only users interested on that specific content and increase the responsibility of the person that tags the work as such. --Panic (talk) 03:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW: Have you kept tabs on the Advanced Interactive Media ? ~~Is the restructuring under any timeline~~VfD discussion here, since it seems to be still evolving as a course and major rewrite and restructuring will still be needed to turn it into a book... --Panic (talk) 04:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It is still in progress. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 18:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

re: Delete

14:54, 2 May 2008 Mike.lifeguard (Talk | contribs) deleted "About the author/Jazzmanian" ‎ (Not textbook material

Any chance of getting the text from this deleted page from a historical version ? Obviously I must have put the page in the wrong spot, and will try and get it right, but I don't have a local copy of the text anywhere. Thanks. GG (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Restored: About the author/Jazzmanian. Please see WB:NP for info on where it should go. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 18:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I've got the text local now, so this can be deleted again. I've read the Naming Policy, WB:NP and am no wiser as to where or how to place my 'about the author' info, but I'll keep reading. GG (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, if this is supposed to be part of a book you're writing, it should be at Book Name/Authors or something. If it's supposed to be about you, but not connected to any particular book, it should go on your userpage. – Mike.lifeguard | ^talk 21:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)